U.S. patent application number 14/964664 was filed with the patent office on 2017-06-15 for workload distribution optimizer.
The applicant listed for this patent is INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION. Invention is credited to JOHN V. DELANEY, ALAN P. MURPHY, CLAUS SCHROEDER-HANSEN, CLEA A. ZOLOTOW.
Application Number | 20170169529 14/964664 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 59019906 |
Filed Date | 2017-06-15 |
United States Patent
Application |
20170169529 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
DELANEY; JOHN V. ; et
al. |
June 15, 2017 |
WORKLOAD DISTRIBUTION OPTIMIZER
Abstract
Workload distribution is automatically optimized. Cost penalty
amounts imposed on executing a database operation transaction by
current and alternative processing pathway options are determined
as a function of execution response times that exceed a service
level agreement time limit. Respective computer processing hardware
costs are determined for executing the database operation
transaction via each of the current and alternative processing
pathway options. Respective licensing costs are determined for
migrating execution of the database operation transaction to each
of the alternative processing pathway options. Accordingly, the
current or alternative middleware option that has a lowest total
combined cost of licensing costs, computer processing hardware
costs and service level agreement penalty costs is chosen as the
path for execution of the database operation transaction.
Inventors: |
DELANEY; JOHN V.;
(KILDALKEY, IE) ; MURPHY; ALAN P.; (DUBLIN,
IE) ; SCHROEDER-HANSEN; CLAUS; (KBH OE, DK) ;
ZOLOTOW; CLEA A.; (KEY WEST, FL) |
|
Applicant: |
Name |
City |
State |
Country |
Type |
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION |
Armonk |
NY |
US |
|
|
Family ID: |
59019906 |
Appl. No.: |
14/964664 |
Filed: |
December 10, 2015 |
Current U.S.
Class: |
1/1 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 10/0633 20130101;
G06Q 50/184 20130101; H04L 41/0826 20130101; H04L 41/5029 20130101;
H04L 41/5096 20130101 |
International
Class: |
G06Q 50/18 20060101
G06Q050/18; H04L 12/24 20060101 H04L012/24; G06Q 10/06 20060101
G06Q010/06 |
Claims
1. A computer-implemented method for automatically optimizing
workload distribution by selecting a lowest cost processing
pathway, the method comprising executing on a computer processor
the steps of: determining a cost penalty amount imposed on
executing a database operation transaction by a current processing
pathway option by a service level agreement as a function of an
execution response time exceeding a time limit of the service level
agreement; identifying at least one alternative processing pathway
option that is available for executing the database operation
transaction; estimating respective response times for executing the
database operation transaction via each of the at least one
alternative processing pathway options; determining respective cost
penalty amounts for each of the at least one alternative processing
pathway options that are imposed by the service level agreement as
a function of their respective estimated execution response times
exceeding a time limit of the service level agreement; determining
respective computer processing hardware costs for executing the
database operation transaction via each of the current and the at
least one alternative processing pathway options; determining
respective licensing costs for migrating execution of the database
operation transaction to each of the at least one alternative
processing pathway options from the current processing pathway
option; and choosing, as a path for execution of the database
operation transaction, a one of the current and the at least one
alternative middleware options that has a lowest total combined
cost of licensing costs, computer processing hardware costs and
service level agreement penalty costs.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: integrating
computer-readable program code into a computer system comprising a
processor, a computer readable memory in circuit communication with
the processor, and a computer readable storage medium in circuit
communication with the processor; and wherein the processor
executes program code instructions stored on the computer-readable
storage medium via the computer readable memory and thereby
performs the steps of determining the cost penalty amount imposed
on executing the database operation transaction by the current
processing pathway option by the service level agreement,
identifying the at least one alternative processing pathway option
that is available for executing the database operation transaction,
estimating the respective response times for executing the database
operation transaction via each of the at least one alternative
processing pathway options, determining the respective cost penalty
amounts for each of the at least one alternative processing pathway
options that are imposed by the service level agreement,
determining the respective computer processing hardware costs for
executing the database operation transaction via each of the
current and the at least one alternative processing pathway
options, determining the respective licensing costs for migrating
execution of the database operation transaction to each of the at
least one alternative processing pathway options from the current
processing pathway option, and choosing as the path for execution
of the database operation transaction the one of the current and
the at least one alternative middleware options that has the lowest
total combined cost of licensing costs, computer processing
hardware costs and service level agreement penalty costs.
3. The method of claim 2, wherein the computer-readable program
code is provided as a service in a cloud environment
4. The method of claim 1, wherein a time limit of the service level
agreement is a response time percentile index value; and the method
further comprising: imposing at least one of the cost penalty
amounts imposed on executing the database operation transaction by
the current processing pathway option and the at least one
alternative processing pathway options in response to a total
percentage of transaction response times that includes the
execution response time of the transaction exceeding the response
time percentile index value during an execution time period that is
specified by the service level agreement.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the processing pathway options
are server options within a two-tier computer system, the method
further comprising: differentially allocating processing loads to
each of the current and alternative server options that are
obtained from a static client loading as a function of differences
in their respective total combined costs of licensing costs,
computer processing hardware costs and service level agreement
penalty costs.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the processing pathway options
are middleware operating system options within a three-tier
computer system, the method further comprising: determining
availability of a mainframe specialty engine on mainframe equipment
associated with each of the at least one alternative middleware
operating system options; and determining the respective response
times for executing the database operation transaction via each of
the current and the alternative middleware operating system options
as a function of ones of the mainframe specialty engines that are
determined to be available for the respective current and
alternative middleware operating system options.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the at least one alternative
middleware operating system option is a plurality of alternative
middleware operating system options, and the step of determining
the respective licensing costs for migrating execution of the
database operation transaction to each of the alternative
middleware operating system options comprises: determining a first
licensing cost for a first of the alternative middleware operating
system options that has a value of zero as a function of a first
middleware software license that enables an instance of the first
alternative middleware operating system that is additional to an
instance of the current middleware operating system; and
determining a second licensing cost for a second of the alternative
middleware operating system options that has a non-zero value as a
function of a different, second middleware software license that
limits a hardware location of a hosting of an instance of the
second alternative middleware operating system to a same computer
system as the current middleware operating system instance, in
response to determining that locations of the current and the
second alternative middleware operating system instances are on
different respective computer systems.
8. The method of claim 7, further comprising: determining a
computer processing hardware cost value for executing the current
transaction on the first alternative operating system option in
response to a license restriction that prevents execution of the
current transaction on a specialty central processing unit of the
first alternative operating system as a function of an application
software type of the first alternative operating system or a
distributed platform origination location of the executing
transaction relative to a location of the first alternative
operating system option; and determining a computer processing
hardware cost value for executing the current transaction on the
second alternative operating system option that is different from
the computer processing hardware cost value for executing the
current transaction on the first alternative operating system
option in response to the license restriction not preventing
execution of the current transaction on a specialty central
processing unit of the second alternative operating system.
9. The method of claim 7, further comprising: determining a
computer processing hardware cost value for executing the current
transaction on the first alternative operating system as a function
of a peak rolling 4 hour average software pricing value that is
applicable to the first alternative operating system; and
determining a computer processing hardware cost value for executing
the current transaction on the second alternative operating system
option that is different from the computer processing hardware cost
value for executing the current transaction on the first
alternative operating system option as a function of a peak load
usage pricing value that is applicable to the second alternative
operating system.
10. The method of claim 7, further comprising: determining the cost
penalty amount for the first alternative operating system as a
non-zero value in response to predicting that a current response
time value of the first alternative operating system that is below
a service level agreement threshold value will exceed the threshold
value as a function of a current logical partition loading value of
the first alternative operating system.
11. The method of claim 7, further comprising: determining a lower
path cost for a third, cloud-based option of the plurality of
alternative operating systems, relative to another of the plurality
of alternative operating systems that has a lower transaction time,
in response to a long time frame operating context of the current
task and to a lower hardware cost accrual for cloud based services
of the third alternative operating system option.
12. A system, comprising: a processor; a computer readable memory
in circuit communication with the processor; and a computer
readable storage medium in circuit communication with the
processor; wherein the processor executes program instructions
stored on the computer-readable storage medium via the computer
readable memory and thereby: determines a cost penalty amount
imposed on executing a database operation transaction by a current
processing pathway option by a service level agreement as a
function of an execution response time exceeding a time limit of
the service level agreement; identifies at least one alternative
processing pathway option that is available for executing the
database operation transaction; estimates respective response times
for executing the database operation transaction via each of the at
least one alternative processing pathway options; determines
respective cost penalty amounts for each of the at least one
alternative processing pathway options that are imposed by the
service level agreement as a function of their respective estimated
execution response times exceeding a time limit of the service
level agreement; determines respective computer processing hardware
costs for executing the database operation transaction via each of
the current and the at least one alternative processing pathway
options; determines respective licensing costs for migrating
execution of the database operation transaction to each of the at
least one alternative processing pathway options from the current
processing pathway option; and chooses, as a path for execution of
the database operation transaction, a one of the current and the at
least one alternative middleware options that has a lowest total
combined cost of licensing costs, computer processing hardware
costs and service level agreement penalty costs.
13. The system of claim 12, wherein the processing pathway options
are server options within a two-tier computer system, and wherein
the processor executes the program instructions stored on the
computer-readable storage medium via the computer readable memory
and thereby further: differentially allocates processing loads to
each of the current and alternative server options that are
obtained from a static client loading as a function of differences
in their respective total combined costs of licensing costs,
computer processing hardware costs and service level agreement
penalty costs.
14. The system of claim 12, wherein the processing pathway options
are middleware operating system options within a three-tier
computer system, and wherein the processor executes the program
instructions stored on the computer-readable storage medium via the
computer readable memory and thereby further: determines
availability of a mainframe specialty engine on mainframe equipment
associated with each of the at least one alternative middleware
operating system options; and determines the respective response
times for executing the database operation transaction via each of
the current and the alternative middleware operating system options
as a function of ones of the mainframe specialty engines that are
determined to be available for the respective current and
alternative middleware operating system options.
15. The system of claim 14, wherein the at least one alternative
middleware operating system option is a plurality of alternative
middleware operating system options, and wherein the processor
executes the program instructions stored on the computer-readable
storage medium via the computer readable memory and thereby
determines the respective licensing costs for migrating execution
of the database operation transaction to each of the alternative
middleware operating system options by: determining a first
licensing cost for a first of the alternative middleware operating
system options that has a value of zero as a function of a first
middleware software license that enables an instance of the first
alternative middleware operating system that is additional to an
instance of the current middleware operating system; and
determining a second licensing cost for a second of the alternative
middleware operating system options that has a non-zero value as a
function of a different, second middleware software license that
limits a hardware location of a hosting of an instance of the
second alternative middleware operating system to a same computer
system as the current middleware operating system instance, in
response to determining that locations of the current and the
second alternative middleware operating system instances are on
different respective computer systems.
16. The system of claim 15, wherein the processor executes the
program instructions stored on the computer-readable storage medium
via the computer readable memory and thereby: determines a computer
processing hardware cost value for executing the current
transaction on the first alternative operating system option in
response to a license restriction that prevents execution of the
current transaction on a specialty central processing unit of the
first alternative operating system as a function of an application
software type of the first alternative operating system or a
distributed platform origination location of the executing
transaction relative to a location of the first alternative
operating system option; and determines a computer processing
hardware cost value for executing the current transaction on the
second alternative operating system option that is different from
the computer processing hardware cost value for executing the
current transaction on the first alternative operating system
option in response to the license restriction not preventing
execution of the current transaction on a specialty central
processing unit of the second alternative operating system.
17. A computer program product for automatically optimizing
workload distribution by selecting a lowest cost processing
pathway, the computer program product comprising: a computer
readable storage medium having computer readable program code
embodied therewith, wherein the computer readable storage medium is
not a transitory signal per se, the computer readable program code
comprising instructions for execution by a processor that cause the
processor to: determine a cost penalty amount imposed on executing
a database operation transaction by a current processing pathway
option by a service level agreement as a function of an execution
response time exceeding a time limit of the service level
agreement; identify at least one alternative processing pathway
option that is available for executing the database operation
transaction; estimate respective response times for executing the
database operation transaction via each of the at least one
alternative processing pathway options; determine respective cost
penalty amounts for each of the at least one alternative processing
pathway options that are imposed by the service level agreement as
a function of their respective estimated execution response times
exceeding a time limit of the service level agreement; determine
respective computer processing hardware costs for executing the
database operation transaction via each of the current and the at
least one alternative processing pathway options; determine
respective licensing costs for migrating execution of the database
operation transaction to each of the at least one alternative
processing pathway options from the current processing pathway
option; and choose, as a path for execution of the database
operation transaction, a one of the current and the at least one
alternative middleware options that has a lowest total combined
cost of licensing costs, computer processing hardware costs and
service level agreement penalty costs.
18. The computer program product of claim 17, wherein the
processing pathway options are server options within a two-tier
computer system, and wherein the computer readable program code
instructions for execution by the processor further cause the
processor to: differentially allocate processing loads to each of
the current and alternative server options that are obtained from a
static client loading as a function of differences in their
respective total combined costs of licensing costs, computer
processing hardware costs and service level agreement penalty
costs.
19. The computer program product of claim 17, wherein the
processing pathway options are middleware operating system options
within a three-tier computer system, and wherein the computer
readable program code instructions for execution by the processor
further cause the processor to: determine availability of a
mainframe specialty engine on mainframe equipment associated with
each of the at least one alternative middleware operating system
options; and determine the respective response times for executing
the database operation transaction via each of the current and the
alternative middleware operating system options as a function of
ones of the mainframe specialty engines that are determined to be
available for the respective current and alternative middleware
operating system options.
20. The computer program product of claim 19, wherein the at least
one alternative middleware operating system option is a plurality
of alternative middleware operating system options, and wherein the
computer readable program code instructions for execution by the
processor further cause the processor to determine the respective
licensing costs for migrating execution of the database operation
transaction to each of the alternative middleware operating system
options by: determining a first licensing cost for a first of the
alternative middleware operating system options that has a value of
zero as a function of a first middleware software license that
enables an instance of the first alternative middleware operating
system that is additional to an instance of the current middleware
operating system; and determining a second licensing cost for a
second of the alternative middleware operating system options that
has a non-zero value as a function of a different, second
middleware software license that limits a hardware location of a
hosting of an instance of the second alternative middleware
operating system to a same computer system as the current
middleware operating system instance, in response to determining
that locations of the current and the second alternative middleware
operating system instances are on different respective computer
systems.
Description
BACKGROUND
[0001] Computing workloads for processing database items and other
forms of data may be distributed among different middleware
operating systems and components, as well as between different
hardware options and types. Implementations may be described as
three-tier systems that include an application layer (for example,
a hypertext transfer protocol ("http") server), middleware and a
database.
[0002] Middleware often sits between an operating system and
applications on different servers and simplifies the development of
applications that leverage services from other applications,
enabling programmers to create business applications without having
to custom craft integrations for each new application. Typically,
middleware programs provide messaging services so that different
applications can communicate using messaging frameworks like
Extensible Markup Language (XML), Simple Object Access Protocol
(SOAP), web services, service oriented architecture (SOA), Web 2.0
infrastructure, Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP),
Representational State Transfer (REST) and JavaScript Object
Notation (JSON). The systematic tying together of disparate
applications, often through the use of middleware is also known as
enterprise application integration (EAI).
[0003] At a basic level, middleware provides services required to
connect applications together such as concurrency, transaction
management, threading and messaging. More sophisticated
implementations of middleware principles are baked into modern
integration infrastructure such as enterprise service bus (ESB) and
API management software to provide greater governance, risk
management and accountability.
BRIEF SUMMARY
[0004] In one aspect of the present invention, a method for
automatically optimizing workload distribution by selecting a
lowest cost processing pathway includes determining a cost penalty
amount imposed on executing a database operation transaction by a
current processing pathway option by a service level agreement as a
function of an execution response time that exceeds a time limit of
the service level agreement. One or more alternative processing
pathway options are identified as available for executing the
database operation transaction, and respective response times are
estimated for executing the database operation transaction via each
of the alternative processing pathway options. Respective cost
penalty amounts are determined for each of the alternative
processing pathway options as imposed by the service level
agreement as a function of their respective estimated execution
response times exceeding a time limit of the service level
agreement. Respective computer processing hardware costs are
determined for executing the database operation transaction via
each of the current and alternative processing pathway options.
Respective licensing costs are determined for migrating execution
of the database operation transaction to each of the alternative
processing pathway options from the current processing pathway
option. Accordingly, the current or alternative middleware option
that has a lowest total combined cost of licensing costs, computer
processing hardware costs and service level agreement penalty costs
is chosen as the path for execution of the database operation
transaction.
[0005] In another aspect, a system has a hardware processor in
circuit communication with a computer readable memory and a
computer-readable storage medium having program instructions stored
thereon. The processor executes the program instructions stored on
the computer-readable storage medium via the computer readable
memory and thereby determines a cost penalty amount imposed on
executing a database operation transaction by a current processing
pathway option by a service level agreement as a function of an
execution response time that exceeds a time limit of the service
level agreement. One or more alternative processing pathway options
are identified as available for executing the database operation
transaction, and respective response times are estimated for
executing the database operation transaction via each of the
alternative processing pathway options. Respective cost penalty
amounts are determined for each of the alternative processing
pathway options as imposed by the service level agreement as a
function of their respective estimated execution response times
exceeding a time limit of the service level agreement. Respective
computer processing hardware costs are determined for executing the
database operation transaction via each of the current and
alternative processing pathway options. Respective licensing costs
are determined for migrating execution of the database operation
transaction to each of the alternative processing pathway options
from the current processing pathway option. Accordingly, the
current or alternative middleware option that has a lowest total
combined cost of licensing costs, computer processing hardware
costs and service level agreement penalty costs is chosen as the
path for execution of the database operation transaction.
[0006] In another aspect, a computer program product for
automatically optimizing workload distribution by selecting a
lowest cost processing pathway has a computer-readable storage
medium with computer readable program code embodied therewith. The
computer readable hardware medium is not a transitory signal per
se. The computer readable program code includes instructions for
execution which cause the processor to determine a cost penalty
amount imposed on executing a database operation transaction by a
current processing pathway option by a service level agreement as a
function of an execution response time that exceeds a time limit of
the service level agreement. One or more alternative processing
pathway options are identified as available for executing the
database operation transaction, and respective response times are
estimated for executing the database operation transaction via each
of the alternative processing pathway options. Respective cost
penalty amounts are determined for each of the alternative
processing pathway options as imposed by the service level
agreement as a function of their respective estimated execution
response times exceeding a time limit of the service level
agreement. Respective computer processing hardware costs are
determined for executing the database operation transaction via
each of the current and alternative processing pathway options.
Respective licensing costs are determined for migrating execution
of the database operation transaction to each of the alternative
processing pathway options from the current processing pathway
option. Accordingly, the current or alternative middleware option
that has a lowest total combined cost of licensing costs, computer
processing hardware costs and service level agreement penalty costs
is chosen as the path for execution of the database operation
transaction.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0007] These and other features of embodiments of the present
invention will be more readily understood from the following
detailed description of the various aspects of the invention taken
in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which:
[0008] FIG. 1 depicts a cloud computing node according to an
embodiment of the present invention.
[0009] FIG. 2 depicts a cloud computing environment according to an
embodiment of the present invention.
[0010] FIG. 3 depicts a computerized aspect according to an
embodiment of the present invention.
[0011] FIG. 4 is a flow chart illustration of a method or process
according to an aspect of the present invention optimizing workload
distribution by selecting a lowest cost middleware path.
[0012] FIG. 5 is a graphic illustration of an embodiment of the
present invention for a three-tier computer system.
[0013] FIG. 6 is a graphic illustration of an alternative
embodiment of the present invention for a two-tier computer
system.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0014] The present invention may be a system, a method, and/or a
computer program product at any possible technical detail level of
integration. The computer program product may include a computer
readable storage medium (or media) having computer readable program
instructions thereon for causing a processor to carry out aspects
of the present invention.
[0015] The computer readable storage medium can be a tangible
device that can retain and store instructions for use by an
instruction execution device. The computer readable storage medium
may be, for example, but is not limited to, an electronic storage
device, a magnetic storage device, an optical storage device, an
electromagnetic storage device, a semiconductor storage device, or
any suitable combination of the foregoing. A non-exhaustive list of
more specific examples of the computer readable storage medium
includes the following: a portable computer diskette, a hard disk,
a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable
programmable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), a static
random access memory (SRAM), a portable compact disc read-only
memory (CD-ROM), a digital versatile disk (DVD), a memory stick, a
floppy disk, a mechanically encoded device such as punch-cards or
raised structures in a groove having instructions recorded thereon,
and any suitable combination of the foregoing. A computer readable
storage medium, as used herein, is not to be construed as being
transitory signals per se, such as radio waves or other freely
propagating electromagnetic waves, electromagnetic waves
propagating through a waveguide or other transmission media (e.g.,
light pulses passing through a fiber-optic cable), or electrical
signals transmitted through a wire.
[0016] Computer readable program instructions described herein can
be downloaded to respective computing/processing devices from a
computer readable storage medium or to an external computer or
external storage device via a network, for example, the Internet, a
local area network, a wide area network and/or a wireless network.
The network may comprise copper transmission cables, optical
transmission fibers, wireless transmission, routers, firewalls,
switches, gateway computers and/or edge servers. A network adapter
card or network interface in each computing/processing device
receives computer readable program instructions from the network
and forwards the computer readable program instructions for storage
in a computer readable storage medium within the respective
computing/processing device.
[0017] Computer readable program instructions for carrying out
operations of the present invention may be assembler instructions,
instruction-set-architecture (ISA) instructions, machine
instructions, machine dependent instructions, microcode, firmware
instructions, state-setting data, configuration data for integrated
circuitry, or either source code or object code written in any
combination of one or more programming languages, including an
object oriented programming language such as Smalltalk, C++, or the
like, and procedural programming languages, such as the "C"
programming language or similar programming languages. The computer
readable program instructions may execute entirely on the user's
computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software
package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote
computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the
latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's
computer through any type of network, including a local area
network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may
be made to an external computer (for example, through the Internet
using an Internet Service Provider). In some embodiments,
electronic circuitry including, for example, programmable logic
circuitry, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA), or programmable
logic arrays (PLA) may execute the computer readable program
instructions by utilizing state information of the computer
readable program instructions to personalize the electronic
circuitry, in order to perform aspects of the present
invention.
[0018] Aspects of the present invention are described herein with
reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of
methods, apparatus (systems), and computer program products
according to embodiments of the invention. It will be understood
that each block of the flowchart illustrations and/or block
diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations
and/or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer readable
program instructions.
[0019] These computer readable program instructions may be provided
to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose
computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to
produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via
the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing
apparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts
specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer readable program instructions may also be stored in
a computer readable storage medium that can direct a computer, a
programmable data processing apparatus, and/or other devices to
function in a particular manner, such that the computer readable
storage medium having instructions stored therein comprises an
article of manufacture including instructions which implement
aspects of the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block
diagram block or blocks.
[0020] The computer readable program instructions may also be
loaded onto a computer, other programmable data processing
apparatus, or other device to cause a series of operational steps
to be performed on the computer, other programmable apparatus or
other device to produce a computer implemented process, such that
the instructions which execute on the computer, other programmable
apparatus, or other device implement the functions/acts specified
in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
[0021] The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate
the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible
implementations of systems, methods, and computer program products
according to various embodiments of the present invention. In this
regard, each block in the flowchart or block diagrams may represent
a module, segment, or portion of instructions, which comprises one
or more executable instructions for implementing the specified
logical function(s). In some alternative implementations, the
functions noted in the block may occur out of the order noted in
the figures. For example, two blocks shown in succession may, in
fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks may
sometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon the
functionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of
the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations
of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can
be implemented by special purpose hardware-based systems that
perform the specified functions or acts or carry out combinations
of special purpose hardware and computer instructions.
[0022] It is understood in advance that although this disclosure
includes a detailed description on cloud computing, implementation
of the teachings recited herein are not limited to a cloud
computing environment. Rather, embodiments of the present invention
are capable of being implemented in conjunction with any other type
of computing environment now known or later developed.
[0023] Cloud computing is a model of service delivery for enabling
convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of
configurable computing resources (e.g. networks, network bandwidth,
servers, processing, memory, storage, applications, virtual
machines, and services) that can be rapidly provisioned and
released with minimal management effort or interaction with a
provider of the service. This cloud model may include at least five
characteristics, at least three service models, and at least four
deployment models.
[0024] Characteristics are as follows:
[0025] On-demand self-service: a cloud consumer can unilaterally
provision computing capabilities, such as server time and network
storage, as needed automatically without requiring human
interaction with the service's provider.
[0026] Broad network access: capabilities are available over a
network and accessed through standard mechanisms that promote use
by heterogeneous thin or thick client platforms (e.g., mobile
phones, laptops, and PDAs).
[0027] Resource pooling: the provider's computing resources are
pooled to serve multiple consumers using a multi-tenant model, with
different physical and virtual resources dynamically assigned and
reassigned according to demand. There is a sense of location
independence in that the consumer generally has no control or
knowledge over the exact location of the provided resources but may
be able to specify location at a higher level of abstraction (e.g.,
country, state, or datacenter).
[0028] Rapid elasticity: capabilities can be rapidly and
elastically provisioned, in some cases automatically, to quickly
scale out and rapidly released to quickly scale in. To the
consumer, the capabilities available for provisioning often appear
to be unlimited and can be purchased in any quantity at any
time.
[0029] Measured service: cloud systems automatically control and
optimize resource use by leveraging a metering capability at some
level of abstraction appropriate to the type of service (e.g.,
storage, processing, bandwidth, and active user accounts). Resource
usage can be monitored, controlled, and reported providing
transparency for both the provider and consumer of the utilized
service.
[0030] Service Models are as follows:
[0031] Software as a Service (SaaS): the capability provided to the
consumer is to use the provider's applications running on a cloud
infrastructure. The applications are accessible from various client
devices through a thin client interface such as a web browser
(e.g., web-based e-mail). The consumer does not manage or control
the underlying cloud infrastructure including network, servers,
operating systems, storage, or even individual application
capabilities, with the possible exception of limited user-specific
application configuration settings.
[0032] Platform as a Service (PaaS): the capability provided to the
consumer is to deploy onto the cloud infrastructure
consumer-created or acquired applications created using programming
languages and tools supported by the provider. The consumer does
not manage or control the underlying cloud infrastructure including
networks, servers, operating systems, or storage, but has control
over the deployed applications and possibly application hosting
environment configurations.
[0033] Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS): the capability provided
to the consumer is to provision processing, storage, networks, and
other fundamental computing resources where the consumer is able to
deploy and run arbitrary software, which can include operating
systems and applications. The consumer does not manage or control
the underlying cloud infrastructure but has control over operating
systems, storage, deployed applications, and possibly limited
control of select networking components (e.g., host firewalls).
[0034] Deployment Models are as follows:
[0035] Private cloud: the cloud infrastructure is operated solely
for an organization. It may be managed by the organization or a
third party and may exist on-premises or off-premises.
[0036] Community cloud: the cloud infrastructure is shared by
several organizations and supports a specific community that has
shared concerns (e.g., mission, security requirements, policy, and
compliance considerations). It may be managed by the organizations
or a third party and may exist on-premises or off-premises.
[0037] Public cloud: the cloud infrastructure is made available to
the general public or a large industry group and is owned by an
organization selling cloud services.
[0038] Hybrid cloud: the cloud infrastructure is a composition of
two or more clouds (private, community, or public) that remain
unique entities but are bound together by standardized or
proprietary technology that enables data and application
portability (e.g., cloud bursting for load-balancing between
clouds).
[0039] A cloud computing environment is service oriented with a
focus on statelessness, low coupling, modularity, and semantic
interoperability. At the heart of cloud computing is an
infrastructure comprising a network of interconnected nodes.
[0040] Referring now to FIG. 1, illustrative cloud computing
environment 50 is depicted. As shown, cloud computing environment
50 comprises one or more cloud computing nodes 10 with which local
computing devices used by cloud consumers, such as, for example,
personal digital assistant (PDA) or cellular telephone 54A, desktop
computer 54B, laptop computer 54C, and/or automobile computer
system 54N may communicate. Nodes 10 may communicate with one
another. They may be grouped (not shown) physically or virtually,
in one or more networks, such as Private, Community, Public, or
Hybrid clouds as described hereinabove, or a combination thereof.
This allows cloud computing environment 50 to offer infrastructure,
platforms and/or software as services for which a cloud consumer
does not need to maintain resources on a local computing device. It
is understood that the types of computing devices 54A-N shown in
FIG. 1 are intended to be illustrative only and that computing
nodes 10 and cloud computing environment 50 can communicate with
any type of computerized device over any type of network and/or
network addressable connection (e.g., using a web browser).
[0041] Referring now to FIG. 2, a set of functional abstraction
layers provided by cloud computing environment 50 (FIG. 1) is
shown. It should be understood in advance that the components,
layers, and functions shown in FIG. 2 are intended to be
illustrative only and embodiments of the invention are not limited
thereto. As depicted, the following layers and corresponding
functions are provided:
[0042] Hardware and software layer 60 includes hardware and
software components. Examples of hardware components include:
mainframes 61; RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer) architecture
based servers 62; servers 63; blade servers 64; storage devices 65;
and networks and networking components 66. In some embodiments,
software components include network application server software 67
and database software 68.
[0043] Virtualization layer 70 provides an abstraction layer from
which the following examples of virtual entities may be provided:
virtual servers 71; virtual storage 72; virtual networks 73,
including virtual private networks; virtual applications and
operating systems 74; and virtual clients 75.
[0044] In one example, management layer 80 may provide the
functions described below. Resource provisioning 81 provides
dynamic procurement of computing resources and other resources that
are utilized to perform tasks within the cloud computing
environment. Metering and Pricing 82 provide cost tracking as
resources are utilized within the cloud computing environment, and
billing or invoicing for consumption of these resources. In one
example, these resources may comprise application software
licenses. Security provides identity verification for cloud
consumers and tasks, as well as protection for data and other
resources. User portal 83 provides access to the cloud computing
environment for consumers and system administrators. Service level
management 84 provides cloud computing resource allocation and
management such that required service levels are met. Service Level
Agreement (SLA) planning and fulfillment 85 provide pre-arrangement
for, and procurement of, cloud computing resources for which a
future requirement is anticipated in accordance with an SLA.
[0045] Workloads layer 90 provides examples of functionality for
which the cloud computing environment may be utilized. Examples of
workloads and functions which may be provided from this layer
include: mapping and navigation 91; software development and
lifecycle management 92; virtual classroom education delivery 93;
data analytics processing 94; transaction processing 95; and
processing 96 optimizing workload distribution by selecting a
lowest cost pathway option path as described below.
[0046] FIG. 3 is a schematic of an example of a programmable device
implementation 10 according to an aspect of the present invention,
which may function as a cloud computing node within the cloud
computing environment of FIG. 2. Programmable device implementation
10 is only one example of a suitable implementation and is not
intended to suggest any limitation as to the scope of use or
functionality of embodiments of the invention described herein.
Regardless, programmable device implementation 10 is capable of
being implemented and/or performing any of the functionality set
forth hereinabove.
[0047] A computer system/server 12 is operational with numerous
other general purpose or special purpose computing system
environments or configurations. Examples of well-known computing
systems, environments, and/or configurations that may be suitable
for use with computer system/server 12 include, but are not limited
to, personal computer systems, server computer systems, thin
clients, thick clients, hand-held or laptop devices, multiprocessor
systems, microprocessor-based systems, set top boxes, programmable
consumer electronics, network PCs, minicomputer systems, mainframe
computer systems, and distributed cloud computing environments that
include any of the above systems or devices, and the like.
[0048] Computer system/server 12 may be described in the general
context of computer system-executable instructions, such as program
modules, being executed by a computer system. Generally, program
modules may include routines, programs, objects, components, logic,
data structures, and so on that perform particular tasks or
implement particular abstract data types. Computer system/server 12
may be practiced in distributed cloud computing environments where
tasks are performed by remote processing devices that are linked
through a communications network. In a distributed cloud computing
environment, program modules may be located in both local and
remote computer system storage media including memory storage
devices.
[0049] The computer system/server 12 is shown in the form of a
general-purpose computing device. The components of computer
system/server 12 may include, but are not limited to, one or more
processors or processing units 16, a system memory 28, and a bus 18
that couples various system components including system memory 28
to processor 16.
[0050] Bus 18 represents one or more of any of several types of bus
structures, including a memory bus or memory controller, a
peripheral bus, an accelerated graphics port, and a processor or
local bus using any of a variety of bus architectures. By way of
example, and not limitation, such architectures include Industry
Standard Architecture (ISA) bus, Micro Channel Architecture (MCA)
bus, Enhanced ISA (EISA) bus, Video Electronics Standards
Association (VESA) local bus, and Peripheral Component
Interconnects (PCI) bus.
[0051] Computer system/server 12 typically includes a variety of
computer system readable media. Such media may be any available
media that is accessible by computer system/server 12, and it
includes both volatile and non-volatile media, removable and
non-removable media.
[0052] System memory 28 can include computer system readable media
in the form of volatile memory, such as random access memory (RAM)
30 and/or cache memory 32. Computer system/server 12 may further
include other removable/non-removable, volatile/non-volatile
computer system storage media. By way of example only, storage
system 34 can be provided for reading from and writing to a
non-removable, non-volatile magnetic media (not shown and typically
called a "hard drive"). Although not shown, a magnetic disk drive
for reading from and writing to a removable, non-volatile magnetic
disk (e.g., a "floppy disk"), and an optical disk drive for reading
from or writing to a removable, non-volatile optical disk such as a
CD-ROM, DVD-ROM or other optical media can be provided. In such
instances, each can be connected to bus 18 by one or more data
media interfaces. As will be further depicted and described below,
memory 28 may include at least one program product having a set
(e.g., at least one) of program modules that are configured to
carry out the functions of embodiments of the invention.
[0053] Program/utility 40, having a set (at least one) of program
modules 42, may be stored in memory 28 by way of example, and not
limitation, as well as an operating system, one or more application
programs, other program modules, and program data. Each of the
operating system, one or more application programs, other program
modules, and program data or some combination thereof, may include
an implementation of a networking environment. Program modules 42
generally carry out the functions and/or methodologies of
embodiments of the invention as described herein.
[0054] Computer system/server 12 may also communicate with one or
more external devices 14 such as a keyboard, a pointing device, a
display 24, etc.; one or more devices that enable a user to
interact with computer system/server 12; and/or any devices (e.g.,
network card, modem, etc.) that enable computer system/server 12 to
communicate with one or more other computing devices. Such
communication can occur via Input/Output (I/O) interfaces 22. Still
yet, computer system/server 12 can communicate with one or more
networks such as a local area network (LAN), a general wide area
network (WAN), and/or a public network (e.g., the Internet) via
network adapter 20. As depicted, network adapter 20 communicates
with the other components of computer system/server 12 via bus 18.
It should be understood that although not shown, other hardware
and/or software components could be used in conjunction with
computer system/server 12. Examples, include, but are not limited
to: microcode, device drivers, redundant processing units, external
disk drive arrays, RAID systems, tape drives, and data archival
storage systems, etc.
[0055] FIG. 4 (or "Fig. 4") illustrates a computer implemented
(method or process) of an aspect of the present invention that
automatically optimizes workload distribution by selecting between
different pathway options to find a lowest cost path as a function
of differences in licensing, hardware cost attributes, availability
of mainframe specialty engines and service level agreement (SLA)
penalty costs. A processor (for example, a central processing unit
(CPU)) executes code, such as code installed on a storage device in
communication with the processor, and thereby functions as an
optimized workload distributor appliance and performs the process
step elements illustrated in FIG. 4.
[0056] At 102 response time data required to execute a database
operation transaction on a current input database by a current (or
"first") processing pathway option is monitored for compliance with
an SLA time limit requirement, namely that it does not require a
time in excess of a limit defined by the SLA (hereinafter sometimes
"an excessive time") and thereby trigger impositions of financial
penalties for failing to comply with terms of the SLA. SLA
objectives are defined as a function of response time, generally in
milliseconds. Response time feeds are taken in on a real time basis
and analyzed against SLA data to ensure that response time
objectives are being met. In some aspects historical data is
collected for workloads executing on other similar processing
pathway software, hardware and operating systems and used to
determine a generalized response time history.
[0057] In response to determining at 103 that the monitored
response time for executing the database operation transaction is
an excessive time and is thereby not compliant with the SLA time
requirement, at 104 an amount of an SLA cost penalty imposed by the
SLA is determined. The amounts may vary as a function of an amount
or frequency of a value that exceeds a specified limit, in some
aspects as considered in the context of a specific time period that
spans the time of execution, as discussed in more detail below.
[0058] At 106 one or more (second, etc.) alternative processing
pathway option is identified that is available for executing the
database operation transaction.
[0059] At 108 respective licensing costs are identified
(determined) that are incurred by migrating execution of the
database operation transaction to each of the alternative
processing pathway options from the current processing pathway
option.
[0060] In an optional step, alternative embodiments according to
the present invention determine at 110 the availability of
mainframe specialty engines on mainframe equipment associated with
the alternative processing pathway options.
[0061] At 112 the process estimates a response time for executing
the database operation transaction via the alternative processing
pathway options (including as a function of any mainframe specialty
engines that are determined in the optional step at 110 to be
available on mainframe equipment associated with the alternative
processing pathway options).
[0062] At 114 the process determines amounts of any SLA cost
penalties imposed on executing the database operation transaction
via the alternative processing pathway options as a function of
compliance or violation of the time limits specified by the
SLA.
[0063] At 116 the process determines respective computer processing
hardware costs for executing of the database operation transaction
via each of the current and the alternative processing pathway
options (including as a function of any available mainframe
specialty engines identified at 112).
[0064] At 118 chooses as a path for execution of the database
operation transaction as the one of the current and the alternative
processing pathway options that has the lowest respective total
combined cost of associated licensing costs, computer processing
hardware costs and SLA penalty costs.
[0065] FIG. 5 is graphic illustration of an embodiment according to
the present invention for a three-tier computer system wherein the
processing pathway options are middleware options. An Optimized
Distributor Workload Appliance (hereinafter sometimes the
"optimizer") 202 according to the present invention is in a
feedback circuit communication (denoted by the dotted-line
connections in FIG. 5) with and thereby takes in response time
feeds from each of available and selectable middleware (or
"midrange") operating systems 204a, 204b, 204c, 204d and 204e which
include the current and one or more alternative middleware options
discussed in FIG. 4. It will be understood that other examples may
have more or less than the five middleware operating systems 204a,
204b, 204c, 204d and 204e discussed in the present example.
Generally, information is updated in a Common Data Model (CMDB)
that includes the software licensing types and amounts of each
workload that will be potentially migrated. The optimizer 202 is
enabled to act like a load balancer, distributing an http workload
from an application layer to one or more of the appropriate
middleware options as a function of a lowest cost determination (at
118, FIG. 4), which may also include migration of query operations
from one to another, lower-cost option of different database
options 210 and 211.
[0066] The optimizer 202 monitors (at 102, FIG. 4) response time
feeds from the middleware operating systems 204a, 204b, 204c, 204d
and 204e for compliance with applicable service level agreement
(SLA) time requirements that are obtained from an SLA database 203
which contains response time information that defines response time
objectives that must be met by the middleware operating systems
204a, 204b, 204c, 204d and 204e.
[0067] In some examples, the SLA response time information
standards are percentile indices, wherein monitored response times
may include a plurality of response times that each exceed a
specified limit, and wherein the a determination that the monitored
times are not compliant with the SLA requirement (at 103 FIG. 4) is
not triggered until a total percentage of the non-compliant
response times meet a threshold limit. For example, for a 90th
percentile SLA requirement that the response times do not exceed
three seconds, 10 transactions out of 100 may exceed the SLA
requirement before a non-compliance determination is made (at 103,
FIG. 4).
[0068] A license database 208 contains the types of software
licenses applicable across the various middleware environments. The
middleware software licenses may be based on (or associated with) a
number of processors accessible to a server where the software is
installed; a number of cores available to a hypervisor or virtual
machine monitor (VMM, a piece of computer software, firmware or
hardware that creates and runs virtual machines), which typically
excludes counting a number of instances/installations of the
software; or a combination of a number of installations and a
number of cores available to the software in each installation. For
example, for the z/Linux.RTM. middleware operating system 204a
under z/VM, an example midrange license is associated with a number
of IFLs available to z/VM either as dedicated IFLs, or the size of
a pool of IFLs that can be shared across all logical partitions
(LPARs) in the CPC. (LINUX is a registered trademark of Linus
Torvalds in the United States, other countries, or both) Other
midrange license cost structure examples for alternative software
that are not processor-intensive may be based on a number of
licensed instances, unrelated to how the instances are hosted.
[0069] In the present example, the z/LINUX middleware operating
systems 204a is licensed under z/VM, feedback to the optimizer 202
is provided by middleware (for example, Websphere.RTM., though
other appropriate middleware software will be apparent to one
skilled in the art), existing Tivoli.RTM. response time records, or
MON CAT data. (TIVOLI and WEBSHERE are registered trademarks of IBM
in the United States or other countries.)
[0070] The x/LINUX (or AIX.RTM.) middleware operating system 204b
provides feedback from middleware (WEBSHERE, etc.), existing TIVOLI
response time records, storage resource management (SRM) or other
performance data. (AIX is a registered trademark of IBM in the
United States or other countries.)
[0071] The Windows.RTM. middleware operating system 204c provides
feedback from the middleware (WEBSHERE, etc.), the existing TIVOLI
response time records, "PerfMon" and other performance data.
(WINDOWS is a registered trademark of the Microsoft Corporation in
the United States or other countries.)
[0072] The z/OS.RTM. middleware operating system 204d provides
feedback from System Management Facility (SMF) records from a
Customer Information Control System (CICS) transaction server run
on the Z/OS mainframe system, including data for response time
features for the middleware. (Z/OS is a registered trademark of IBM
in the United States or other countries.)
[0073] The Cloud middleware Operating Systems (OS) 204e is run on a
public or private cloud 205, and provides feedback as discussed
with the options 204a, 204b, 204c and 204d. It will be understood
that any of the other middleware options 204a, 204b, 204c and 204d
may also be run within the cloud 205, however additional network
time may have to be added to their respective transaction response
times.
[0074] A database back end 210 generally includes a standard Z/OS
Virtual storage access method (VSAM) file, wherein feedback to the
optimizer 202 may be acquired from either the middleware (WEBSHERE,
etc.), existing TIVOLI response time records, SMF or Resource
Management Facility (RMF) records, though other examples of the
database 210 may include any query-able database, for example an
Oracle.RTM. Database, etc. (ORACLE is a registered trademark of
Oracle and/or its affiliates in the United States or other
countries.) A cloud database 211 option may be on any operating
system supported by the cloud 205, and is generally used as a
read-only database. This avoids the need to synchronize writes
across two disparate databases, which may be problematic due to
limitations on using data-sharing (as a secondary database may not
be on Z/OS).
[0075] Efficiently distributing computing workloads for processing
database items among different middleware and hardware resource
options is difficult in the prior art. Mainframe platforms
typically have a complex software pricing scheme, commonly based on
the lowest of logical partition (LPAR) defined capacity, or on
usage as tracked in a four-hour rolling average, wherein charges
are based on a highest four-hour average. Managing mainframe
technology is also made more complex by the presence of specialty
engines that do not count against MSU cost charges wherein the MSU
signifies a measurement of the amount of processing work a computer
can perform in one hour. Different hardware equipment may also have
different acquisition, power and maintenance and associated labor
costs (for example, some geographic areas will have higher costs
for machine acquisition or operation labor for the same equipment
relative to other areas).
[0076] In contrast, the optimizer 202 of FIG. 5 uses feedback loop
communications to select a most-optimal one of the middleware
options 204a, 204b, 204c, 204d and 204e for a next set of
transactions, based on optimized end-to-end response times and
computational and monetary costs that determined via predictive
elements and processes. Aspects determine which optimal path will
create response time benefits while not incurring excessive total
costs that comprehend any prevent service-level agreement (SLA)
penalties.
[0077] Different implementations of the same middleware software
costs may also have different licensing costs. For example, a site
license may cover multiple, repeating licenses across the same
physical site, while instance licenses create an additional charge
for each license created, and host licenses will not incur
additional expenses for additional license creations as long as
certain conditions are met (for example, that all the licenses stay
on a same physical host and do not travel to a different machine).
Mainframe software licensing information and rates within the
license database 208 may be typically associated with (based on) a
peak rolling 4 hour average (R4H), where the system monitors the
current R4H average and a user or service provider may define a
performance cap based on a set value, and may constrain the use of
specialty CPUs that can be used for certain, specified workloads,
wherein any work run on these specialty CPUs are not recorded under
the R4H average.
[0078] Whether work is eligible to be run on specialty CPUs is
dictated by the application type (Java.TM. for example is eligible)
and also on where the transaction originated (for example, a DB2
query originating on distributed platforms may be eligible). (JAVA
all Java-based trademarks and logos are trademarks or registered
trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates.) License types
considered for cost generation include LPAR, box, site, "million
service units" ("MSU"), 4-hour, and costs associated per license
and per MSU. Accordingly, aspects consider as inputs platform-based
software pricing determined from the license database 208, for
example based on a peak rolling 4 hour average for a current or
first platform (such as for IBM z System.TM. usage), or based on
peak load usage for a different, alternative or second platform. (Z
SYSTEM is a trademark of the International Business Machines
Corporation ("IBM") in the United States or other countries.) Thus,
optimal path determinations may be responsive to different costs
that accrue for similar amounts of usage of the same middleware
software item, based on differences in the type of license that
applies to the usage, hardware and location costs, the criteria
used to calculate rates applicable to mainframe equipment usage,
the presence or use of specialty engines within the mainframe
equipment, etc.
[0079] Prior art methods and system fail to efficiently predict or
estimate actual software costs in view of the complexities noted
above. Price estimates determined and optimized at the time of
installation of the machine and the application may be
unnecessarily high, due to failures to optimize path as a function
of underlying transaction costs. For example, under the prior art
information technology (IT) architects typically look at a current
install base for mainframe databases, middleware placement, and
server hypertext transfer protocol (http) farms and try to optimize
a single path for expenses. This type of architecture does not take
into account that many applications and middleware can run on many
different types of operating systems and hardware, that they may be
re-optimized "in-flight" to take advantage of cost optimization on
a transaction by transaction basis.
[0080] For example, ad-hoc user-written jobs are very common for
analytics and are used extensively in retail, insurance and
banking. These huge Structured Query Language (SQL) queries run
against mainframe databases. As they start running externally from
a mainframe, a significant percentage (for example, 60% of the
workload) could run on a specialty engine, leaving only 40% of the
utilization as chargeable to the MSUs. However, when the MSUs
realize a defined four-hour rolling average or a defined MSU limit,
this results in a throttling of the workload under the prior
art.
[0081] In contrast, aspects of the present invention are responsive
to determinations that a read-only workload may experience a higher
transaction time in milliseconds (ms), but a cheaper cost if run to
a copy of the database located in a cloud. While such an approach
would elongate the workload significantly, relative to an overall,
long time-frame operating context that indicates that the task may
run for six to ten hours already, another three hours of added time
may not negatively impact efficiencies and requirements for
performing the task, and thus such a selection may define an
optimal path over other middleware options, in view of the lower
hardware costs accruing to the for cloud based services of the
cloud option.
[0082] As illustrated in FIG. 5, in one example for a three-tier
application the optimizer 202 determines that an optimized (lowest
total cost) path 212 for executing a response to an application
layer http server 214 database query that is received from a
smartphone or other programmable device 218 (that is in
communication with the application layer 214 via the internet or
other network communication option 216) is satisfied by using the
x/LINUX middleware operating system 204b and the WINDOWS middleware
operating system 204c to engage the database 210.
[0083] In another example of optimization according to the present
invention, an http server 214 utilizes the WINDOWS 204c and Z/OS
204d middleware options (for WEBSHERE) going to a Z/OS DB2.RTM.
database 210. (DB2 is a registered trademark of IBM in the United
States or other countries.) If the middleware is on a mainframe the
utilization of a specialty engine (for example, a "System z
Integrated Information Processor (zIIP)") may not be invoked. Thus,
when a four-hour rolling average cap is reached, the optimizer 202
uses a Z/LINUX middleware instance 204a that is not on the
mainframe, utilizing Z/LINUX under Z/VM. The Z/OS side 204d
recognizes that a middleware workload is coming in and starts using
a specialty engine, thus reducing the number of MSUs.
[0084] Prior art methods and system also fail to efficiently
minimize software pricing and licensing costs and other monetary
costs accruing from transactional loading of computer systems. The
costs accrued from the use of any given pathway option may be
unnecessarily high if transactions are not optimized for the Total
Cost of Ownership (TCO) that comprehends software costs (MSU,
four-hour rolling averages), license costs (site licenses, host
licenses, and instance licenses), hardware equipment (acquisition,
power and maintenance) and differential labor costs (for example,
some geographic areas have higher costs for machine acquisition or
operation labor relative to other areas). Under the prior art TCO
is optimized at the time of installation of the machine and the
application. Information Technology (IT) architects typically look
at a current install base for mainframe databases, middleware
placement, and server hypertext transfer protocol (http) farms and
try to optimize a single path for expenses. This type of
architecture does not take into account that many applications and
middleware can run on many different types of operating systems and
hardware, that they may be re-optimized "in-flight" to take
advantage of cost optimization on a transaction by transaction
basis.
[0085] In one example, the optimizer 202 looks at the percentile
transaction times for a given period (for example, month, day,
quarter, etc.) for a one of the middleware options 204b, 204c, 204d
and 204e that is currently handling a workload and determines that
some transactions are tracking to 3.3 seconds. The optimizer 202
determines that these response times are out of compliance with an
applicable SLA, wherein a monthly US$10,000 penalty is triggered
for exceeding a 3.0 seconds threshold. Historic data input to the
optimizer 202 indicates that similar transactions when handled by
the alternative Z/LINUX middleware option 204a use an internal
queued direct I/O that consistently outperforms a single gigabit
Ethernet used by the current middleware option 204b, 204c, 204d and
204e and provides reduced response times, wherein transaction
response times may be cut in half, which brings the timing in
compliance with the SLA and drops the SLA penalty cost to zero.
Though the migration costs US$500 for an additional monthly Z/LINUX
option 204a license cost, total cost of the migration option is
much less than the total costs of the current option, due to
avoiding the SLA penalty. Accordingly, the optimizer 202
automatically and autonomously migrates the workload to the lowest
cost path Z/LINUX middleware option 204a.
[0086] In another example, the optimizer 202 migrates a workload
from a current x/WINDOWS middleware option 204c to an alternative
Z/OS middleware option 204d as the most-likely lowest cost path in
response to
[0087] In another example, the optimizer 202 determines that a
current x/WINDOWS middleware 204c option is out of compliance with
an SLA response time for a current transaction, which will result
in imposition of a $10,000 SLA penalty for not reducing the
response time. The optimizer 202 determines that the Z/OS
middleware option 204d will cut the response time by 2/3 (for
example, as it sits right next to the database 210), but also that
the LPAR is capped at 100 MSUs and is currently running 3 hours and
59 minutes at that MSU rate. This indicates that the current
transaction is likely to go into latent demand, which will not
avoid the US$10,000 penalty, and thus this penalty is still
considered within the total overall cost of the alternative Z/OS
middleware option 204d. However, the licensing costs are lower for
the alternative Z/OS middleware option (for example, by $500 USD),
which accordingly results in selection of the alternative Z/OS
middleware option 204d as a lowest cost path option (at 118 of FIG.
4).
[0088] In another example, licenses potentially applicable to
migrating a middleware workload from a current x/WINDOWS option
204c to an alternative Z/LINUX middleware option 204a include a
site license that covers an installation of each (and thereby
obviates additional licenses fees); an additional machine license
that imposes $500 USD in license cost if the alternative Z/LINUX
middleware option 204a must be run on an additional machine, but no
(zero) cost if it can run on the same machine as the current
x/WINDOWS option 204c; and a per instance license that imposes $500
USD for an additional instance of the alternative z/LINUX
middleware option 204a, whether it runs on the same machine or not.
The optimizer 202 determines that a current hardware environment
requires that the current x/WINDOWS 204c and the alternative
z/LINUX middleware options must run on different computer systems
or "boxes" (for example, in response identifying the differences in
the "x" and "Z" system identifiers), and that a site license does
not apply to a current physical location of options for the
different boxes, and thus that a minimum additional license cost of
US$500 per month is factored into the total cost of the path
through the alternative z/LINUX middleware option 204a relative to
the cost of path through the current x/WINDOWS 204c option.
[0089] FIG. 6 is a graphic illustration of an alternative
embodiment of the present invention for a two-tier architecture
wherein the processing pathway options are server options. An
alternative Optimized Distributor Workload Appliance ("optimizer")
302 according to the present invention is in a feedback circuit
communication (denoted by the dotted-line connections in FIG. 6)
with and thereby takes in response time feeds from each of
available and selectable server options operating systems that
include a Z/LINUX server 304a, an x/LINUX server 304b, a WINDOWS
server 304c, a Z/OS server 304d and cloud-based server 304e that
has a cloud-based operating system. Client transactions 314 are
driven in response to smartphone or other programmable device 318
inputs received from the internet 316 or other network
communication option. The client 314 loading is static while
processing loads distributed to the server options 304a, 304b,
304c, 304d and 304e are varied by optimizer 302 in a fashion
similar or analogous to the processes and examples described above
with respect to the three-tier system of FIG. 5, thus according to
determined differences in their hardware performance costs, needs
and attributes, SLA costs and software licensing costs, as a
function of data from the SLA database 303 data and the software
license database 308.
[0090] Thus, aspects of the present invention provide linear
optimization models that determine optimal weighting of the
response time versus the software costs through a feedback loop.
The aspects determine and describe various ways the cost of
delivery can be derived and the benefits of one type of delivery
over another versus the cost of each delivery, which may vary based
on many factors, including time of day, MSUs, license limits,
user-defined capacity, rolling four-hour averages, and Z/OS
applications for non-specialty engine work vs. midrange/mobile
workload pricing.
[0091] Optimization appliances 202 and 302 according to the present
invention may bias toward loading selected middleware or server
options to near peak capacity in response to determining that
license costs do not accrue from associated increases in CPU time
expenditures. This lowers total path costs as compared to prior art
approaches that would otherwise migrate loads to alternative
options to stay below peak loading, wherein the migration results
in incurring additional license purchase costs. For example, when a
license for an additional core or integrated facility for Power
Integrated Facility for LINUX (Power IFL) is paid, the price of an
individual transaction gets cheaper with increases in loading in
the core or IFL. Aspects may run a CPU at a 100% busy level, above
allowable tolerances in prior art management, in response to
determining or predicting that a risk of an SLA penalty is high
unless this configuration is adopted, calculating which options to
use to either incur an affordable SLA penalty (relative to high
licensing or performance costs), or to avoid the SLA penalty.
[0092] Prior art methods do not teach moving workloads for cost
optimization in response to the inputs and determination
specifically defined and described herein. Prior art teachings as
to optimizing workload across operating systems generally do not
take into account mainframe specialty engines and software costs as
inputs to drive decisions, but instead focus upon only response
time objectives. Aspects of the present invention provide
advantages in the cost efficient management and operation of
mainframes resources, by enabling greater flexibility for workloads
running across multiple operating systems and enabling customers to
automatically and autonomously select between cost-optimization
options that may be deployed across mid-range and mainframe
environments without incurring SLA penalties.
[0093] The terminology used herein is for describing particular
aspects only and is not intended to be limiting of the invention.
As used herein, the singular forms "a", "an" and "the" are intended
to include the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly
indicates otherwise. It will be further understood that the terms
"include" and "including" when used in this specification specify
the presence of stated features, integers, steps, operations,
elements, and/or components, but do not preclude the presence or
addition of one or more other features, integers, steps,
operations, elements, components, and/or groups thereof. Certain
examples and elements described in the present specification,
including in the claims and as illustrated in the figures, may be
distinguished or otherwise identified from others by unique
adjectives (e.g. a "first" element distinguished from another
"second" or "third" of a plurality of elements, a "primary"
distinguished from a "secondary" one or "another" item, etc.) Such
identifying adjectives are generally used to reduce confusion or
uncertainty, and are not to be construed to limit the claims to any
specific illustrated element or embodiment, or to imply any
precedence, ordering or ranking of any claim elements, limitations
or process steps.
[0094] The descriptions of the various embodiments of the present
invention have been presented for purposes of illustration, but are
not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the embodiments
disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to
those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope
and spirit of the described embodiments. The terminology used
herein was chosen to best explain the principles of the
embodiments, the practical application or technical improvement
over technologies found in the marketplace, or to enable others of
ordinary skill in the art to understand the embodiments disclosed
herein.
* * * * *